Legal Opinion

Seebold v. Holbrook

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 2, 1954No. 1464PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

QUINN, Associate Judge.

Appellant, defendant below, was sued for damages for breach of a contract. The case was tried by the court, sitting without a jury, and on November 18, 1953, the court entered a finding for plaintiff. On November 23 defendant filed a motion for a new trial and also requested permission to file an amended answer and counterclaim. The motion was denied on December 1, 1953, and judgment entered. On the same date a motion for a rehearing of defendant’s motion for new trial was filed. The rehearing was granted, and the motion for new trial was again denied on December 9.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Randolph v. RandolphCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
  2. Burke v. LoughrinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1952

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Valentine v. Real Estate CommissionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1960
  2. Gardner v. B. F. Saul Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1955
  3. Willis v. George Washington Life InsuranceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API